considers

WASHINGTON — President Trump is scheduled to speak with Russia’s Vladimir Putin Thursday as he considers Ukraine’s push for long-range missiles, according to a White House official who was not authorized to comment on the private call and spoke on the condition of anonymity.

The call comes ahead of Trump’s meeting on Friday at the White House with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. The Ukrainian leader has been pressing Trump to sell Kyiv Tomahawk missiles which would allow Ukrainian forces to strike deeper into Russian territory.

Zelensky has argued such strikes would help compel Putin to take Trump’s calls for direct negotiations between the Russia and Ukraine to end the war more seriously.

With a fragile Israel-Hamas ceasefire and hostage deal holding, Trump has said he’s now turning his attention to bringing Russia’s war on Ukraine to an end and is weighing providing Kyiv long-range weaponry as he looks to prod Moscow to the negotiating table.

Ending the wars in Ukraine and Gaza was central to Trump’s 2024 reelection pitch, in which he persistently pilloried President Joe Biden for his handling of the conflicts. Yet, like his predecessor, Trump also has been stymied by Putin as he’s unsuccessfully pressed the Russian leader to hold direct talks with Zelensky to end the war that is nearing its fourth year.

But fresh off the Gaza ceasefire, Trump is showing new confidence that he can finally make headway on ending the Russian invasion. He’s also signaling that he’s ready to step up pressure on Putin if he doesn’t come to the table soon.

“Interestingly we made progress today, because of what’s happened in the Middle East,” Trump said of the Russia-Ukraine war on Wednesday evening as he welcomed supporters of his White House ballroom project to a glitzy dinner.

Earlier this week in Jerusalem, in a speech to the Knesset, Trump predicted the truce in Gaza would lay the groundwork for the U.S. to help Israel and many of its Middle East neighbors normalize relations. But Trump also made clear his top foreign policy priority now is ending the largest armed conflict in Europe since World War II.

“First we have to get Russia done,” Trump said, turning to his special envoy Steve Witkoff, who has also served as his administration’s chief interlocutor with Putin. “We gotta get that one done. If you don’t mind, Steve, let’s focus on Russia first. All right?”

Trump weighs Tomahawks for Ukraine

Trump is set to host Zelensky for talks Friday, their fourth face-to-face meeting this year.

Ahead of the meeting, Trump has said he’s weighing selling Kyiv long-range Tomahawk cruise missiles, which would allow Ukraine to strike deep into Russian territory — if Putin doesn’t settle the war soon. Zelensky, who has long sought the weapons system, said it would help Ukraine put the sort of pressure on Russia needed to get Putin to engage in peace talks.

Putin has made clear that providing Ukraine with Tomahawks would cross a red line and further damage relations between Moscow and Washington.

But Trump has been undeterred.

“He’d like to have Tomahawks,” Trump said of Zelensky on Tuesday. “We have a lot of Tomahawks.”

Agreeing to sell Ukraine Tomahawks would be a splashy move, said Mark Montgomery, an analyst at the conservative Foundation for Defense of Democracies in Washington. But it could take years to supply and train Kyiv on the Tomahawk system.

Montgomery said Ukraine could be better served in the near term with a surge of Extended Range Attack Munition (ERAM) missiles and Army Tactical Missile System, known as ATACMS. The U.S. already approved the sale of up to 3,350 ERAMs to Kyiv earlier this year.

The Tomahawk, with a range of about 995 miles (1,600 kilometers), would allow Ukraine to strike far deeper in Russian territory than either the ERAM (about 285 miles, or 460 km) or ATACMS (about 186 miles, or 300 kilometers).

“To provide Tomahawks is as much a political decision as it is a military decision,” Montgomery said. “The ERAM is shorter range, but this can help them put pressure on Russia operationally, on their logistics, the command and control, and its force disbursement within several hundred kilometers of the front line. It can be very effective.”

Signs of White House interest in new Russia sanctions

Zelensky is expected to reiterate his plea to Trump to hit Russia’s economy with further sanctions, something the Republican, to date, has appeared reluctant to do.

Congress has weighed legislation that would lead to tougher sanctions on Moscow, but Trump has largely focused his attention on pressuring NATO members and other allies to cut off their purchases of Russian oil, the engine fueling Moscow’s war machine. To that end, Trump said Wednesday that India, which became one of Russia’s biggest crude buyers after the Ukraine invasion, had agreed to stop buying oil from Moscow.

Waiting for Trump’s blessing is legislation in the Senate that would impose steep tariffs on countries that purchase Russia’s oil, gas, uranium and other exports in an attempt to cripple Moscow economically.

Though the president hasn’t formally endorsed it — and Republican leaders do not plan to move forward without his support — the White House has shown, behind the scenes, more interest in the bill in recent weeks.

Administration officials have gone through the legislation in depth, offering line edits and requesting technical changes, according to two officials with knowledge of the discussions between the White House and the Senate. That has been interpreted on Capitol Hill as a sign that Trump is getting more serious about the legislation, sponsored by close ally Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., along with Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn.

A White House official said the administration is working with lawmakers to make sure that “introduced bills advance the president’s foreign policy objectives and authorities.” The official, who was granted anonymity to discuss private deliberations, said any sanctions package needs to give the president “complete flexibility.”

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said Wednesday the administration is waiting for greater buy-in from Europe, which he noted faces a bigger threat from Russian aggression than the U.S. does.

“So all I hear from the Europeans is that Putin is coming to Warsaw,” Bessent said. “There are very few things in life I’m sure about. I’m sure he’s not coming to Boston. So, we will respond … if our European partners will join us.”

Madhani and Kim write for the Associated Press. AP writers Fatima Hussein, Chris Megerian and Didi Tang contributed to this report.

Cracks seem to be appearing in the pan-European Future Combat Air System (FCAS) program, at the heart of which will be the crewed New Generation Fighter (NGF). Reports now suggest that Germany, one of the two major partners in FCAS, is looking at how it might separate itself from France, amid long-running misgivings over workshare arrangements in this vital program.

According to Politico, the German Ministry of Defense discussed the future of FCAS last week with Airbus, which leads the German side of the program. The article cited two unnamed people familiar with those discussions. Reportedly, German defense officials are unhappy with French demands to have a disproportionate share of the program and are now examining other options.

The same article states that German Luftwaffe officials briefed Bundestag lawmakers on the issue earlier this week, quoting an official in the legislature.

According to reports in the German defense media, France is pushing for an 80 percent share of the work on the crewed NGF combat jet, something French officials have denied.

“At some point [the German] parliament will have to say: ‘Either we need this aircraft, or we don’t,’” Social Democratic lawmaker Andreas Schwarz told Politico.

Among the options the German government is said to be exploring is to continue with FCAS without France, although the feasibility of that is highly questionable.

The implication is that Germany would pursue FCAS alongside Spain, which joined the program later, followed by Belgium, as a junior partner. Both Germany and Spain have production lines for the Eurofighter Typhoon, but Germany has not designed and built a crewed combat jet, outside of a wider consortium, for many decades, while Spain has never embarked on such a program, other than as part of the pan-European Eurofighter program.

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz was in Madrid yesterday, where he discussed FCAS with Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez.

“We share the assessment that the current situation is unsatisfactory. We are not advancing with this project,” Merz said. “We are both speaking with the French government, and we want a solution as soon as possible.”

On the other hand, whatever path Germany chooses, Spain and/or Belgium might still choose to stay with France, where Dassault Aviation leads that side of the program.

Other possibilities that the German government is said to be weighing up include Germany teaming up with the United Kingdom or Sweden.

Confusingly, the FCAS nomenclature is also used by British-led and Swedish future air combat initiatives, which also feature a crewed fighter at the center, as well as a range of supporting drones and other advanced technologies.

Like the pan-European equivalent, the U.K.-led FCAS is planned to include more than just a new crewed tactical jet, including uncrewed platforms, next-generation weapons, networks and data sharing, and more.

The Tempest fighter at the heart of the U.K. FCAS program also slots into an international collaborative program to field the aircraft, plus associated support and training, to the United Kingdom, Italy, and Japan. This effort is known as the Global Combat Air Program (GCAP).

Were Germany to join the U.K.-led FCAS/GCAP effort, it would therefore join Italy and Japan. The suggestion of the U.K.’s BAE Systems, which heads up the British FCAS program, joining Germany to develop a separate new-generation combat aircraft seems much less likely.

Interestingly, when he was chief of the German Luftwaffe, Lt. Gen. Ingo Gerhartz promoted efforts to bring the British and pan-European FCAS programs together by speaking with his Italian and British counterparts. “It can be that we go on different tracks,” Gerhartz told Defense News in 2021. “Hopefully, we will merge eventually.”

On the face of it, Sweden might seem like a more likely partner for Germany, although the country is at a much earlier stage in its FCAS thinking. So far, Saab has presented concepts for a potential new-generation crewed fighter and a series of drones intended to work alongside it.

At this point, it appears that Saab considers drones to be very much at the heart of its FCAS initiative, something that is perhaps not as immediately obvious with the rival British and pan-European programs, although that could change, especially if Germany plots a new course. Already, Airbus and Kratos are pitching the stealthy XQ-58A Valkyrie drone to the German Luftwaffe, and Airbus has also been working to fill an emerging niche for ‘loyal wingman’-type drones, including a stealthy CCA-like concept of its own, known as Wingman.

Saab was also previously involved with the British FCAS program before stepping aside from that.

For Germany, however, time is running out if it wants to reconfigure its position in FCAS and still achieve the goal of replacing its current Eurofighter combat aircraft with a new ‘system of systems,’ including a crewed fighter, around 2040. The U.K.-led FCAS also hopes to field a new fighter and supporting systems around the same time. With that in mind, it’s reported that German officials want guarantees about their country’s role in the program before the end of the year.

In the medium term, Germany’s need for an advanced crewed combat aircraft will be offset somewhat by the arrival of the F-35A, 35 of which are on order, initially to replace the Tornado swing-wing combat jet in the nuclear strike role. Interestingly, reports from earlier this summer suggested that Berlin might be interested in buying another 15 F-35As, for a total of 50, as a bridging solution before FCAS, although officials subsequently denied that was a plan — for the time being, at least.

Now, more than ever, there appears to be a real possibility of Germany and France going their separate ways in the pan-European FCAS, although whether that will lead to four separate FCAS efforts in Europe (including Sweden’s) seems much less likely. Already, there are serious questions about the ability of the continent to sustain a program as expensive and complex as this, especially without guarantees of significant export sales or foreign investment.

The pan-European FCAS may well be at something of a crossroads now, with the defense ministers from France, Germany, and Spain due to meet next month to hammer out the details of the program’s future.

The results of those talks will likely influence whether the program moves into Phase 2, in which the companies involved will produce a demonstrator aircraft. Such a decision is due before the end of this year.

Even then, however, it might not be too late for things to change.

It’s worth recalling that France was originally part of the European consortium that eventually developed and produced the Eurofighter, before leaving that program’s progenitor, and going it alone with the Dassault-developed Rafale.

As far as France’s position on FCAS is concerned, it appears that officials want to speed up the program, in particular wanting to have more control over decision-making, rather than having to discuss details with German and French partners, increasing the risk of delays. This appears to apply to the NGF combat jet, in particular.

While the pan-European FCAS has long been dogged by disputes over workshare arrangements, the timing of the current tensions could hardly be worse. The timeline to get the aircraft and other systems into service is already very tight, and the countries involved are seeking to build up their armed forces in the face of a growing Russian threat on NATO’s eastern flank. More immediately, the French political situation is also in some disarray.

It’s by no means clear that the current frictions will lead to a major reshaping of the pan-European FCAS, and perhaps even alter the paths of rival efforts in Europe. At the very least, however, such issues are likely to delay what is already a highly ambitious and technologically demanding effort.

Contact the author: [email protected]

Tehran, Iran – Iran’s authorities are discussing what comes next following an agreement with the global nuclear watchdog, as they urge the region to go beyond issuing statements in reaction to Israel’s attack on Qatar.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi is heading to an emergency meeting of the parliament’s national security commission on Saturday evening, with hardline lawmakers looking for answers as to whether the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) will be allowed to access nuclear sites bombed by the United States and Israel in June.

He is expected to reassure the hardline-dominated parliament that no access will be given to the IAEA without strict permission from the top echelon.

Araghchi had reached an agreement with the IAEA in Cairo, Egypt, on Tuesday, to try to resume cooperation that had been suspended after Tehran accused the nuclear watchdog and its chief, Rafael Grossi, of having paved the way for the strikes.

Grossi told the IAEA Board of Governors on Wednesday that the technical agreement includes “all facilities and installations in Iran” and “contemplates the required reporting on all the attacked facilities, including the nuclear material present”.

But Araghchi told Iranian state television that agency inspectors have no access to Iranian nuclear sites beyond the Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant.

He said case-by-case permission would have to be granted by the country’s Supreme National Security Council, which includes the president, parliament and judiciary chiefs, several ministers, military commanders and those appointed by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Araghchi also confirmed that Iran’s high-enriched uranium is “under the rubble of bombed facilities”, and said the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran is investigating and assessing whether the sites are accessible or contaminated.

Europe’s ‘snapback’ and Iranian threats

Amir Hayat Moghadam, a hardline member of the parliament’s national security commission, claimed that Araghchi said Iran will leave the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) if United Nations sanctions are reinstated against the country, according to the state-linked Tabnak news website, ahead of the meeting on Saturday.

Araghchi and the foreign ministry have confirmed that legislation is in motion aimed at abandoning the global non-proliferation pact, but that finalising such a move would only potentially come if the “snapback” mechanism of Iran’s 2015 nuclear deal with world powers is abused by European countries.

France, Germany and the United Kingdom triggered the snapback mechanism in late August and were slammed by China and Russia, the other signatories to the landmark nuclear accord that the US unilaterally abandoned in 2018.

The European countries, known as the E3, gave Iran one month to reach a new agreement over its nuclear programme or face international sanctions.

Iran maintains that the three would lose legitimacy if they go through with the threat, and will “empower the US and marginalise Europe in future diplomatic engagements”.

Despite the rising tensions, Araghchi announced on Thursday that Iran and France are close to agreeing on a prisoner swap and expressed hope that an exchange would happen “in the coming days”.

Iran’s top diplomat did not detail which French prisoners held in Iran would be released, but said the exchange would include Mahdieh Esfandiari, an Iranian woman arrested in France over posts about Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza.

Esfandiari, a translator living in the French city of Lyon since 2018, was arrested in February, with French authorities accusing her of incitement to and glorification of “terrorism” and “hate speech” against Jewish people over posts on Telegram.

Tehran calls her a “hostage”, employing the word used by France and other European countries that have accused Iran for decades of holding foreign and dual-national citizens in relation to espionage charges.

‘Joint operation room against Israeli madness’

Fighting off surging pressure from the US and its allies, Iranian authorities have tried to warm ties with China and Russia, and to find common ground with regional players, particularly Arab neighbours, over Israel’s aggressions.

After Israel attacked Qatar for the first time this week in a failed attempt to assassinate the top leadership of Hamas, Iran joined the chorus of regional and international condemnation.

Ali Larijani, who was appointed Iran’s security chief last month, went further on Saturday and issued what he called a “warning to Islamic governments”.

“Holding a conference of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation filled with speeches without any practical outcome (as happens in UN Security Council meetings) in truth amounts to issuing a new order of aggression in favour of the Zionist entity!”, he wrote on X in Arabic, in reference to Israel.

“At the very least, form a ‘joint operations room’ against the madness of this entity,” Larijani said, adding that “you have done nothing for the hungry and oppressed Muslims in Palestine, at least take a modest decision to avert your own annihilation”.

Qatar announced on Saturday that it will host an emergency Arab-Islamic summit on Monday in Doha, preceded by a preparatory meeting of foreign ministers on Sunday.

Qatar’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Majed bin Mohammed al-Ansari said in a statement that “the summit will discuss a draft statement” on the Israeli attack.

Iran said President Masoud Pezeshkian will represent the country in the summit.

Aug. 9 (UPI) — President Donald Trump reportedly wants the U.S. government to sell Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac stock in a quest to move the mortgage finance companies from full federal control.

The initial public offering, which would be possible the largest in history, was first reported by The Wall Street Journal and later confirmed by CNN and The New York Times.

The outlets reported that the plans have not been finalized for Fannie Mae, which is short for Federal National Mortgage Association, and was created in 1938 as part of President Frank Roosevelt’s New Deal. Freddie Mac, which stands for Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp., began in 1970 to further expand the secondary mortgage market.

An IPO of up to 15% of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac could raise $30 billion, according to the media outlets.

The New York Times reported that Trump met with executives from the nation’s largest banks — Jamie Dimon of JPMorgan, David Solomon of Goldman Sachs, Brian Moynihan of Bank of America and Jane Fraser of Citigroup. He asked them to come up with a way to sell shares on the stock market. The companies represent a big portion of the $12 trillion mortgage market.

Wall Street investors also met with Treasury officials, the New York Times reported.

Trump has wanted to privatize the companies since his first term in the White House.

“I am giving very serious consideration to bringing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac public. …. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are doing very well, throwing off a lot of CASH, and the time would seem to be right,” he posted on Truth Social on May 22.

Federal Housing Finance Agency, which currently controls the two companies, has been headed since March by Bill Pulte, the grandson of the founder of PulteGroup, a residential and home construction company. He, too, has favored selling stock in the companies, but has said they should remain under the federal conservatorship.

With interest rates relatively high, CNN reported that some analysts fear the privatization would hurt the mortgage market. This could make it even more expensive to borrow money to buy a new home with high sale prices.

In 2024, Mark Zandi, the chief economist at Moody’s Analytics, estimated privatization would boost the average mortgage by an extra $1,800 to $2,800 each year.

Before the 2008 Great Recession, the companies were private and only backed by the U.S. Treasury, but were placed under what was planned as a temporary government conservatorship.

The market crash was caused as relaxed lending standards fueled banks giving subprime loans to people with poor credit who should not have qualified, and required a $187 billion government bailout to prevent lenders from filing for bankruptcy and a potential crash of the economy.

Fannie and Freddie buy mortgages from lenders and repackage them for investors in a way to keep mortgages more affordable, in addition to guaranteeing bond investors that they will help out if too many borrowers default.

The role has kept mortgage rates relatively low and stabilized the 30-year fixed mortgage, the national rate for which currently stands at around 6.58%.

Jaret Seiberg, a financial services and housing policy analyst at TD Cowen Financial, told CNN in May that the spinoff might not happen until late 2026 or early 2027.

The Treasury Department holds about 80% of the common stock and also has senior preferred shares. Investors Bill Ackman and John Paulson, who endorsed Trump for president, bought shares several years ago with the hope the government would sell stock, according to the Journal and the Times.

The shake-up comes after the men’s side suffered its worst season with nine defeats in 10 games that drew a total losing sequence of 18 matches, a run that only ended last weekend with a 31-22 victory in the second Test against Japan.

“The current rugby system in Wales, which includes national teams, professional clubs, community clubs, academies, universities and schools isn’t delivering consistent success on the field and isn’t currently financially sustainable given the likely investment required, even with the recent actions taken to increase financial resources,” the WRU said.

“The WRU is therefore considering a more radical strategy focused on maximising investment and reforming the whole structure of professional rugby in Wales, amongst other options.”

The group said it would call for analysis on international supply chain resilience.

Finance ministers and central bank governors from the Group of Seven (G7) democracies have pledged to address “excessive imbalances” in the global economy and said they could increase sanctions on Russia.

The G7 announced the plan on Thursday as the officials, who met in the Canadian Rocky Mountains, said there was a need for a common understanding of how “non-market policies and practices” undermine international economic security.

The document did not name China, but references by the United States and other G7 economies to non-market policies and practices often are targeted at China’s state subsidies and export-driven economic model.

The final communique called for an analysis of market concentration and international supply chain resilience.

“We agree on the importance of a level playing field and taking a broadly coordinated approach to address the harm caused by those who do not abide by the same rules and lack transparency,” it said.

Lowering Russian oil price cap

European Commission Executive Vice President Valdis Dombrovskis said the G7 ministers discussed proposals for further sanctions on Russia to try to end its war in Ukraine. They included lowering the G7-led $60-per-barrel price cap on Russian oil, given that Russian crude is now selling under that level, he said.

The G7 participants condemned what they called Russia’s “continued brutal war” against Ukraine and said that if efforts to achieve a ceasefire failed, they would explore all possible options, including “further ramping up sanctions”.

Russia’s sovereign assets in G7 jurisdictions would remain immobilised until Moscow ended the war and paid for the damage it has caused to Ukraine, the communique said. It did not mention a price cap.

Brent crude currently trades at around $64 per barrel.

A European official said the US is “not convinced” about lowering the Russian oil price cap.

Earlier this week, the US Treasury said Secretary Scott Bessent intended to press G7 allies to focus on rebalancing the global economy to protect workers and companies from China’s “unfair practices”.

The communique also recognised an increase in low-value international “de minimis” package shipments that can overwhelm customs and tax collection systems and be used for smuggling drugs and other illicit goods.

The duty-free de minimis exemption for packages valued below $800 has been exploited by Chinese e-commerce companies including Shein and Temu.

Ukraine’s European allies are considering the possibility of using their air forces to defend the country’s western skies from drone and missile attacks without the help of the United States, sources familiar with the talks tell Al Jazeera.

The plan, known as Skyshield, could put NATO planes and pilots into Ukrainian airspace for the first time, sending a powerful political message to Russia that Europe is committed to Ukraine’s defence.

Skyshield is more likely to come into effect as part of any ceasefire, especially if European ground forces are committed. But it was designed by Ukrainian and British aviation experts to work under combat conditions as well.

“It’s being taken very seriously into consideration by the UK, France,” said Victoria Vdovychenko, an expert on hybrid warfare at Cambridge University’s Centre for Geopolitics, who has sat at some of the meetings. “German colleagues and Italian colleagues also do know about that, as well as the Scandinavian colleagues,” she said.

When it comes to implementing Skyshield in wartime conditions, she admits, “some of the partners are still fluctuating in their decision making”.

Skyshield was published in February and is the brainchild of Price of Freedom, a Ukrainian think tank founded by Lesya Orobets. She came up with the idea during an air defence crisis last spring, when Republican lawmakers in the US delayed the passage of a $60bn bill to send more aid to Ukraine.

During a phone call with the head of Ukraine’s air force, Orobets was told, “We are in the middle of a missile crisis. We don’t have enough [interceptors] to shoot down the missiles.”

Skyshield calls for the deployment of 120 European aircraft to protect Ukrainian civilian infrastructure and export corridors along the Danube River and the Black Sea, freeing up the Ukrainian Air Force to focus on the first line of defence in the contested east of the country.

“There would be a piece of land of 200 kilometres [125 miles] between them at least,” said Orobets.

European jets would be based in neighbouring Poland and Romania, and fly mostly west of the Dnipro, protecting Kyiv on both sides of the river in the north of the country.

A higher-risk strategy

Western commanders are wary of costs, casualties and military implications.

Hourly flight costs, which include training, parts and maintenance, range from $28,000 for an F-16 to about $45,000 for a fourth-generation Rafale jet, Colonel Konstantinos Zikidis of the Hellenic Air Force told Al Jazeera.

“We’d have to pay for people to be there, several shifts a day in all specialities … it will be exhausting,” he said, referring to aircraft technicians and pilots.

“On the other hand, the proposal downplays the effectiveness of air defence systems, which are very effective against cruise missiles and have a far lower hourly operating cost than aircraft,” Zikidis said.

“It’s also not really the job of aircraft to hunt down cruise missiles. They can do it if they are given coordinates by air command. They can’t go out on flight patrol and spot them by chance. So you need a very thick radar array to cover a given area, especially at low altitude.”

European NATO members do not operate AWACS airborne radar, which would be the ideal tool for the job according to Zikidis, but Ukrainian pilots have already downed Russian cruise missiles using air-to-air missiles, suggesting the ground-based radar assets are there.

Europe has provided Ukraine with Patriot and Samp-T long-range air defence systems and Iris-T medium-range systems, but these are enough only to protect larger urban centres, said Vdovychenko. Russia is also stepping up its attacks. Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said on May 4 that Russia had launched almost 1,200 long-range kamikaze drones and 10 missiles in just a week.

These types of weapons are routinely directed at civilian and industrial infrastructure, not the front lines, and Russian President Vladimir Putin is increasing production. Last year, Russia’s factory at Alabuga produced 6,000 Shahed/Geran long-range drones, said Ukraine’s head of the Center for Countering Disinformation, Andriy Kovalenko, last month. He said Putin set production at 8,000-10,000 drones this year.

The effects are visible. High-profile attacks on Kryvyi Rih, Kharkiv and Kyiv have killed dozens of people this year.

The second problem European air forces would face is that of casualties.

“If one European plane falls and a pilot is killed, it will be very difficult for a European government to explain it,” said Zikidis. “For a Greek pilot to go and get killed in Ukraine could bring the government down,” he added.

“I don’t think that there is a political will [for that], and that is what stops this partially,” said Vdovychenko.

But Orobets put this risk in a wider context.

“We’re talking about catching cruise missiles and putting down the offensive drones, which is quite an easy target for trained pilots,” she told Al Jazeera. “So we do consider Skyshield to be less risky [than enforcing a no-fly zone] or any participation of the European troops closer to the front line.”

Strategic intimidation

Thirdly, there are the military implications. Skyshield is partly about freeing up the Ukrainian Air Force to strike deeper inside Russia, deploying the estimated 85 F-16s it is being given.

That is because Russia has this year intensified its use of controlled air bombs (CABs), which are directed against front lines, reportedly dropping 5,000 in April versus 4,800 in March, 3,370 in February and 1,830 in January.

Ukraine would target the airfields from which Russian jets take off to drop the CABs. It would also move missile launch systems closer to the front lines, increasing their reach inside Russia.

CABs are Russia’s most effective weapon at the front, and it has successfully leveraged its nuclear arsenal to intimidate NATO into allowing them to be flown in.

The Biden administration had refused to allow Ukraine to deploy Army Tactical Missile Systems (ATACMSs), which have a range of 300km (190 miles), because Russia considered their use dependent on US intelligence, in its view, making the US a cobelligerent in the war.

It has expressed exactly the same view of Germany sending its 500km (310-mile) range Taurus missile to Ukraine.

In the same vein, Russia has threatened to act against any European force deployment to Ukraine.

Russian Security Council Secretary Sergei Shoigu last month told a summit of the foreign ministers of the BRICS group of states in Rio de Janeiro that “military units of Western states on Ukrainian territory … will be considered as legitimate targets”.

These threats have been effective. The Biden administration was against the idea of allowing the Polish and Romanian air forces to shoot down drones and missiles in Ukrainian airspace that were headed into Polish and Romanian airspace, Orobets said.

The Biden administration “thought that if any American pilot on any American jet or any Western jet would enter the Ukrainian airspace, then America or another country would become cobelligerent”, she said.

The same applied to the notion of Europeans entering Ukraine’s airspace.

“They were scared that Russians would then escalate to the level of a conflict they could not sustain. So that was the only reason. There was no reason like, ‘Oh, we cannot do that’,” she said.